When I read The Lost Traveller I wasn't sure if it was actually a good book, or just a good bad book (i.e. a book I found it very easy to be interesteWhen I read The Lost Traveller I wasn't sure if it was actually a good book, or just a good bad book (i.e. a book I found it very easy to be interested in and enjoy reading). I think this, and The Sugar House (which I read together), are good books, though. Antonia White apparently thought The Sugar House the best of her novels; she might be right, but I found Beyond the Glass more interesting, because it was less depressing, if more tragic.

Hm, should be clearer. The Sugar House is about the main character Clara's marriage to a man she doesn't love, an alcoholic, and the breakdown of that marriage and her depression. In Beyond the Glass Clara has separated from her husband and is waiting for her marriage to be annulled; she has a weird telepathic love affair but then goes mad and is put in an asylum.

I'm not keen on the books' depiction of love or its gender politics -- there's rather a lot of unsubtle crushing to the chest by the male partner -- but they do contain the clearest depictions of mental illness that I've read in a while. I found The Sugar House depressing because I recognised the kind of aimless awfulness in it. Beyond the Glass was more interesting because it had more about what people think of as insanity, so it wasn't as close to my experience and had less of the personal effect.

Oh, I should say it has added impact because according to the preface, the novels are basically autobiographical; Antonia White spent 10 months in an asylum (which is now the Imperial War Museum just down the road, talk about coincidences). And I guess that's what makes the books good rather than good-bad, really. The things I find interesting -- Clara's father's Catholicism and class issues, the way she approaches religion, her fraught relationship with her mother, the mother herself -- they're interesting precisely because they're not generic. When Clara's dad angsts about Catholicism, it's not to make a point about religion and its effect on a person's life; it's not a depiction of just any religious person's struggle -- it's a portrait of a specific human being and his personal relationship with God and the Church. So that's super interesting. I've always believed in story over metaphor, when it comes to writing novels.

At one point there's a paragraph about Clara at Mass and how she's never had trouble before telling herself, "This is the most important thing in the world," which I found so intriguing because it is so alien to me. I tried the question "what is the most important thing in the world to you personally?" on a couple of my friends and found you have to say "besides family and friends" when you are talking to non-religious people. Anyway they both said "social justice" and I said "art" (well, I said "writing", but I MEANT "art"). I am going to try the question on a Catholic person, that should be interesting....more

At first I wasn't impressed, then I got more impressed because I figured the narrative was keeping a lot of things from us, so welWhat a strange book.

At first I wasn't impressed, then I got more impressed because I figured the narrative was keeping a lot of things from us, so well done, narrative. But then the narrative didn't burst out with any stunning revelation. (I don't count what happened to his parents as a stunning revelation, because I wasn't curious enough about what happened to them, though of course it woulda pissed me off if he hadn't revealed it in the end.) I *was* curious about what was going on with this dude, but I didn't feel that was explained properly at the end.

And also, like, I dunno, man. Perhaps the best way to explain it is this. When my friend saw this book on my desk, she said, "Oh, that! I've read that. I didn't like it that much." I asked her what she didn't like about it. "You know when British people are being super British, in an annoying way? Like, when your British friend comes up when you're eating dinner with your Indian friends, and she's like, omg, why are you eating with your hands, that is disgusting?

"That is what that book is like," said my friend.

This is my feeling about it. Also everything -- and everyone -- felt very artificial. A resounding meh from me. I think Ishiguro is very good at suggesting things, but not having anything of substance behind the suggestions.

ETA: Okay, having read other reviews, I see that the lack of explanation is perhaps the point. Hmm.

I would modify the last line, then: maybe there's lots of substance behind the suggestions, but Ishiguro prefers to stick to suggesting. I don't really see the point of that -- throwing punches in the dark -- but I'll read more of Ishiguro's work before deciding....more

I can't remember if this is interwar or Edwardian, so I've tagged it as both. It wasn't very interesting. I thought it might be sort of a satire, theI can't remember if this is interwar or Edwardian, so I've tagged it as both. It wasn't very interesting. I thought it might be sort of a satire, the kind where they don't say what they mean but you know what they mean and it is a delicate critique or whatever, but it's actually half Bridget Jones (only old-school and married with kids) and half boring bitching about other people. Meh....more

I liked this -- some interesting things about power and privilege. The Lauristons are one of the best take-offs of a certain kind of mind-set that I'vI liked this -- some interesting things about power and privilege. The Lauristons are one of the best take-offs of a certain kind of mind-set that I've seen. I was also kind of impressed by the stuff on race -- at one point she started on analogy of white people talking to natives that made me get all skeeved out, but when I continued I saw that the analogy was skewering said white people's preconceptions about and condescension towards "natives", rather than just being creepy about white people vs. natives. I mean, it wasn't the most progressive thing ever; it was just nice to have something not turn out as bad as I thought it would be....more

I really enjoyed this -- it is an indulgence of a book, but well-written and intelligent -- but my enjoyment was marred by casual anti-Semitism and hoI really enjoyed this -- it is an indulgence of a book, but well-written and intelligent -- but my enjoyment was marred by casual anti-Semitism and homophobia. Sigh.

Also for some reason till nearly the end of the book I was labouring under the delusion that her husband was named Bingo. So when she met the One I thought he must be another faily boyfriend and was secretly waiting to find out what the catch was. Whoops!...more

Really liked this actually. I knew I would enjoy it because Persephone Books are surefire trashy comfort reads for me, as romance novels are for otherReally liked this actually. I knew I would enjoy it because Persephone Books are surefire trashy comfort reads for me, as romance novels are for other people. But it makes better literature than I expected. I liked the observation about people and human nature, and the close attention given to each change of mood in a person, leading them to snap or be kind, almost unconsciously. Also interested in how little your average privileged upper middle-class mindset varies across time and space.

Why did Sandy do it??? I don't get it, though that was part of the charm. Impressed by the structure of the book, how past and present and future areWhy did Sandy do it??? I don't get it, though that was part of the charm. Impressed by the structure of the book, how past and present and future are all woven together. Liked being able to recognise the place names, having just spent three weeks last summer in Edinburgh.

Muriel Spark is a little weird on race. I can't decide if it's better for this sort of book to just leave us out altogether, or for us to be in a corner while everyone else is being a bit weird about us. I think I really prefer the former; makes it more like the PoC-less fantasy world it really is....more

Celebrity gossip with a patina of literary scholarship. I enjoyed reading it and found the writing fluid and reasonably intelligent. But it was from aCelebrity gossip with a patina of literary scholarship. I enjoyed reading it and found the writing fluid and reasonably intelligent. But it was from a staunchly heteronormative, conventional viewpoint; you kind of know from the outset that Roiphe's not going to say anything challenging or useful about marriage or gender roles, when she describes marriage as something "most of us" experience in the preface. Slightly boggled by her offhand dismissal of the discrimination faced by lesbians in early 20th-century Europe; less boggled, because unsurprised, by the whiteness of the narration (black South African guests at a dinner party described as "exotic"; no comment at all on Radclyffe Hall's habit of referring to her Russian girlfriend as "chinky eyed").

Still, it was precisely what I wanted to read -- something like Hello! but more interesting. Also confirmed the fact that I need to pick up Virginia Woolf's diaries/letters; she's so deliciously gossipy. One of those people who thinks of interesting ways to describe other people....more

What a horrible book. Evil lesbian, "nasty" appearing to be used to mean "homosexual" (as in, "Albert was a nasty boy"), casual racism. And even withoWhat a horrible book. Evil lesbian, "nasty" appearing to be used to mean "homosexual" (as in, "Albert was a nasty boy"), casual racism. And even without all that it was a relentlessly unpleasant book.

Three stars because it was so effectively, deliberately horrible. I was absorbed even as my brain made "bleh spit spit" faces....more

I liked this much better than when I first read it -- I don't know why, since I think I would've been a teenager when I read itc&ped from my blog:

I liked this much better than when I first read it -- I don't know why, since I think I would've been a teenager when I read it first and you'd think it was the perfect book to read as a teenager, but I wasn't that into the romance stuff the first time. And it is nearly all romance stuff!

The first time I read the book I wasn't that impressed by Simon, and was perplexed when Cassandra falls in love with him -- I think I thought he still had his weird beard. Also nothing really happens to make her fall in love with him! I mean I didn't feel he displayed any special charm or sexual magnetism. I still don't feel this now -- like, I don't get any sense of chemistry between them, whereas Rose and Neil do have chemistry -- in fact I find Simon strangely sexless. Though maybe that's not strange, since it's Cassandra's first love? Maybe she wants it innocent.

But now I kind of understand falling in love almost purely because it's time, and also, yeah, an intelligent older man taking an interest in you and playing music for your appreciation and then dancing with you to a romantic song is totally enough.

That said, my god, Stephen is totally hot. I would hit that with the fist of an angry god. I do kind of ship it, though I feel Stephen deserves better -- not better than Cassandra, because I like her very much. But I'm not very keen on unrequited love stories where after a long time the other side finally decides to requite. I'm a big believer in cutting your losses and running -- if it was meant to be, wouldn't they already have requited your affection?

Still don't love the book madly, but I like it much better than I did the first time I read it, and can now see why people do love it so much. If you asked me to choose the best out of Dodie Smith's works, I would still choose the Dalmations books, though!...more

**spoiler alert** This was a funny one. It was so incredibly mannered it was ridiculous. All the characters sounded the same, and their dialogue was a**spoiler alert** This was a funny one. It was so incredibly mannered it was ridiculous. All the characters sounded the same, and their dialogue was all equally unnatural. I don't remember the other Rebecca West book I read being so artificial. And it was so super obsessed with this dividing line between ordinary people and SPECIAL people (the main characters being the speshulest snowflakes ever).

I really wanted to find out why Cousin Rosamund married the dude. I know they tell you in the afterword, but it isn't the same. And I still want that ending to have been written and for me to have read it even though I suspect it would have been spectacularly faily -- the description of her husband is so weirdly racialised. Also, she married him so she could be martyred in a concentration camp? I just ... Rebecca West. Dude. How could you think that was a good idea?

And yet there's something there. West has a way of expressing feminist insights that feel particularly fresh, that seem to reveal something new about society, or really reveal something you already knew but in a way that makes it even more convincing. And feminist insight aside, the book was absorbing, I couldn't put it down. Mind you, British interwar women's fiction is the genre of my er not really heart, probably loins or something embarrassing like that, so I'm not sure that says much about it. But West had something. It's weird how obscure she is now....more

Man, Rebecca West, you are so pretentious! And yet there is something true under all that blah blah blah. I'm not going to quit you, but I AM going toMan, Rebecca West, you are so pretentious! And yet there is something true under all that blah blah blah. I'm not going to quit you, but I AM going to make many a disapproving sniff while reading your books....more

Oh god this is HORRENDOUS. I skimmed this very quickly and deleted it from my Kindle the minute I was finished.

To describe this sufficiently I'd haveOh god this is HORRENDOUS. I skimmed this very quickly and deleted it from my Kindle the minute I was finished.

To describe this sufficiently I'd have to type the word HORRENDOUS over and over again. HORRIFIC also suitable. One star for the first chapter of Diana, whom I liked as a character. I would like to read a story about her that wasn't all HORROR.

Synopsis: mind-bogglingly racist chronicle of beautiful high-spirited woman who dresses and lives as a man, travels into the desert and is raped into submission and self-abnegating love by a sheik. I read this because of the extremely interesting and worthwhile reviews of the book by dorothean and sanguinity on DW:

I particularly recommend dorothean's post even if you haven't read the book and have no plans to. (DON'T READ THE BOOK.)

ETA: Editing to add, having read the other reviews on GR, that I didn't actually find any moments of guilty pleasure in it. I thought the writing was surprisingly decent but only liked the parts where Diana is thinking -- the parts at the beginning where she's revelling in the joy of being in the desert, for example, are quite vivid -- and once the abduction, rape and mental torture begin it's just like, OH GOD GET IT AWAY....more

This is so much my kind of thing I am kind of wishing I hadn't gobbled it up in one weekend, and had instead saved it for my summer holiday next week.This is so much my kind of thing I am kind of wishing I hadn't gobbled it up in one weekend, and had instead saved it for my summer holiday next week. Lesbian poet with issues and an invalid ma hangs out with Bloomsbury types and is biographied (there must be a better word than this, but it escapes me ...) by Penelope Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald is a little weird on the subj. of Mew's sexuality (do we really say people are or aren't "homoerotic"?) but otherwise a pleasure to read, as always. I even liked Mew's poetry....more